Designed 1984 by Bob McWilliams and produced by 3W (published in The Wargamer Magazine, issue #-32) the game features Napoleon's first major clash with the Allied (Russian and Prussian forces) during his spring offensive in Germany of 1813.
NAL is a two-player game having one player controlling the Allied forces and the other taking command of the French forces. A multiple-player variant is not outlined in the rules, but would be easy to implement and is encouraged for more realistic play. Nevertheless the solitair playability is high, too.

COMPONENTS:

The map -drawn by Kevin Zucker!- is a bit less of Zucker's professional designs we are used to. It totals a full 32x22 inch size, but shows all necessary charts and tables needed for play at the outer edges, so the net playing ground is a simple 19.5x14.5. The on-map tables/charts are:
* Allied and French chain of command,
* Allied and French Corps morale track,
* Order character table,
* Victory point references,
* Victory point record table,
* Melee Combat result table,
* Fire combat result table and
* Turn record table.

It comes with a rulebook of 15 pages,


MAP & COUNTERS:

Game scale is 402 meters (0,25mi)/hex, while each game turn representing 30min of real time. Unit's size varying from regiments/ brigades or smaller per counter.

The unit counters depict the standard NATO-typ tactical symbols of infantry, cavalry and artillery, added by the name of the Divisional comander and his parent Corps' designation on top as the fire/ melee-strength and the normal movement allowance underneath. - Interestingly is the fire/melee factor broken out separately just for Russian infantry units only.

Artillery units have a separate support fire factor (half of barrage strength) and barrage/ melee strength.

Leader units just have a just a movement factor.

The counters have a reduced side, indicated by a white middle strip, while some of them even have a third reduced step by a second (further reduced) unit counter, indicated by a black dot next to this unit's fire strength.


ORDERS:

Order markers are added for several functions:
Some markers are just for the obvious reason of "keeping track" of moral or the victory status, depicted on the map.

Much more interest is given to the real "order" markers. These counters are spirit of "the most interesting game concept that raises this game above the SPI's 'Napoleon-at-War'-level", as one has judged this game.

They have the function to show destinct orders given to the individual units by their leaders.

Leader units are mostly Corps commanders and give orders to their individual Corps' units. (A neatly drawn on-map Chain of
Command table illustrates who can give orders to what unit)

Leaders must trace LOC of any length to an Army leader or a map edge.

Orders are assigned to units by tracing LOC from Leader units within 6 hexes and are impacted by Corps
morale level. (Each Order is detailed in an on-map table.) Selected orders have impact on different functions as of:
* movement allowances,
* fire and
* melee strength and
* ZOCs (making
them rigid or fluid).

These order counters are marked (to show the specific orders to be followed):
* "RES" (unit put into Reserve Status. No movement by a fliud ZOC, with no fire- and halved melee strength),
* "ART BATTERY" (artillery units may move only 1 hex ba a fluid ZOC, but normal fire strength),
* "MARCH" (units are able to march full capacity plus an extra movement point by using bridges and roads. All their ZOC's are fluid and the melee strength halved. While infantry units have a halfed fire strength, artillery units may fir at all),
* "CAV CHARGE" (cavalry units charge with 150% strength and have their movement allowance increased by 1 hex, but have to end their movement in an enemy ZOC, extending an own rigid ZOC),
* "INF FIRE" (infantry units may only move 1 hex by a fluid ZOC and may fire with their full strength, but melee only with their halved strength) and
* "INF ASSAULT" (infantry units have their normal movement allowance and may assault/melee with a 150%, but fire only


OPTIONAL RULES:

Optional rules include
* "combined arms melee"-bonus (1 column shift to either left when defending or right when attacking) with three arms and
* "cavalry withdraw before combat" whenever a non-phasing player's cavalry is to be attacked by non-cavalry forces within the melee phase.
* optional command sources by limiting to road map edges only.

Victory points (VP) are gained by either controlling several geographical objectives or by losing moral points due to lowering of Corps' moral level. The levels are adjusted after the last phase of each game turn.

At the end of the game the victory points gained are compared by subtracting the Allied from the French VP total. The higher a positive result is the higher a French victory is achieved, as the Allied win the higher a negative result should be.


SCENARIOS:

The game offers three scenarios.

The 1. scenario is called "Ney Caught Short" and will demonstrate how inept Ney's deployment historically was. The Allies should take the offered chance and strike hard onto the wide spred French units and claim some VP's before Napoleon appears on the battlefield and "gets his act together".

The 2. scenario (called "Stupidity in the Allied Command") used also the historical setup, but restricts the Allieds in committal of forces due to diversional debates in the Allied HQ (where even the Prussian King as the Russian Tzar had been present) to the strategy and tactics to be used during the battle.

The 3. scenario, called "Wittgenstein's Early Start" uses a "what-if" situation, as the Allied overall commander Wittgenstein could have drafted his battle orders far more clearly, which would have resulted in the abscents of chaotic road movement and a much more early (more than 4 hours!) approach to the battlefield.


RATIONAL:

All in all one can say that this game gives a historical feeling of what was going on during that specific battle on May 2nd in 1813 at Lutzen, just some miles southwest of Leipzig, about 5 months prior the epic Battle of Nations!

"What if", does not only mean the Allied could have won the battle at Lutzen, what they historically could have achieved! But they also could have been desperatly beaten too, if the French (including Napoleon) would have been as motivated as in 1806! Would the French have been up to the standards of 1806/07, Austria wouldn't have joined the Alliance and Leipzig wouldn't have been taken place... - meaning "what if" at its best!

Ok, back to the game mechanics. The game is scaled close to Kevin Zucker's traditional "Napoleon's Last Battles" (NLB) and uses the same step reduction loss system. On the other hand it uses the very innovative order chits, which make command & control more realistic. Additional to that the game uses a different "combat result table" (CRT), which adopts to the variety of fire and melee options. On the one hand it is more bloody than the NLB CRT, on the other hand it applies the results to the different commands given to the specific units.

While I playtested the game I realized the difference very harmful:
While used to the "traditional" NLB's CRT, I was pressing forward the Allied troops with INF-ASSAULT orders to gain a fast VP push into my favour and got a bloody nose when the French used INF-FIRE orders in extend. The result was a dramatic victory for Napoleon, giving the Allies no chance but to flee the battlefield.
On the other side, if one uses the order chits careful to the most efficiency, it will give him the most powerful push.

At the end I will go ahead and want to try Markus Stumptner's special "Last Battles of Napoleon" rule system, testing its usefulness to this battle.


by Andy (521tiger)